Crastinate

With the Yahoo and Microsoft rumor mill STILL buzzing, it’s hard to know whether Yahoo, after all the drama, will eventually land on their feet. Yahoo just announced a reshuffling of some top executives after the recent exodus of top-level employees. Everyone has their own opinion on the matter. Here is my open letter to Yahoo:

Dear Yahoo,

You are one of the most visited, if not the most visited, web property in the world. You had the insight to buy Delicious and Flickr while others were still questioning Web 2.0. You had all the properties necessary to compete with Facebook and Myspace and yet you didn’t unify your offerings into a cohesive social networking product. This has happened time and time again where you miss an opportunity to capitalize on your strengths and compete in a new market.

Another new market is emerging. This market is tired of being stuck in walled gardens. This market wants open access to all applications and information streams. You have the ability to provide this new market what they’re looking for. Focus on aggregating information. Don’t be a competitor to anyone. Be above everyone. Be that top layer (see what FriendFeed is trying to do). You have the ability now to redefine what Yahoo is. Make it a consumer evangelist company. Make it something we, as web users, can get behind and be proud of. Google’s mantra “Don’t be evil” has been running thin lately. We need a new web hero. Be our web hero.

Don’t worry about your investors. If they haven’t sold your stock by now, they’re in it for the long haul. Focus on improving your products. Were behind you. Just be communicative. Let us know what is going on. Be honest about it. We’re ok with delays, but not lies. Others are gunning to be our next web hero. The odds are not in your favor. Prove the critics wrong. It’s time to innovate. Get to it.

Ely Rosenstock

Hillary Clinton made a direct appeal yesterday to the world for more donations. What was that you ask? You thought Hillary dropped out of the race? Well, she did. But she’s in debt. Of the $22.5 million of unpaid campaign debts, $12 million is owed to Hillary Clinton. She financed the tail end of her campaign when funds were running low. That didn’t seem to work out so well. I’m not going to get into politics here and which candidate I like or dislike (I dislike all of them). I would like to talk about the pure chutzpah/cajones/gaul of Hillary Clinton to ask for more money.

Let’s say I was a donor to Clinton’s campaign. I’ve given money to help Clinton get into office. I never expect to see a penny back from that donation. Whether Clinton wins or loses, my donation was just that, a donation towards a cause that I believed in. But now, the candidate that I gave my hard earned money to is asking for more. And why? So she can get her money back. What about the money I gave?! How come Hillary isn’t giving donors back money from HER pockets? This is how I would feel if I was a donor (which I am not).

She’s got some nerve. But I’m not surprised. She’s a politician. It all comes back to watching their own backs, and watching their own bank accounts. Don’t kid yourself. It’s ALL about the money.

One of the first summer internships I applied to for this summer was at Associated Press (middle of getting my MBA). They paid well and they offered a Web 2.0 MBA internship that would provide a student the ability to help bring the huge traditional media organization into the forefront of web news. I was emailed by the head of recruiting over at AP requesting that I apply. I sent over my resume and was greeted with a reply that they only accept resumes via post. Actual physical mail… stamps and all. They would also require a recommendation from a professor, typed and signed, sent via the mail. This company wants to be the leader of web 2.0 news? They can’t even use email efficiently!

With this experience, I am not surprised by the latest controversies surrounding the AP. Apparently, the AP doesn’t want anyone, anywhere, to quote them without explicit permission. Even if a blogger can legally quote an excerpt from an article according to the fair use clause of copyright law, the AP feels it can make its own rules. Unfortunately for the AP, us bloggers, and the internet as a whole, don’t care much about following rules that aren’t legal (and even those we bend as much as we can). If anyone out there feels the need to complain, make sure you write them a letter and send it in the mail. They still haven’t figured out the whole email thing yet.

Reddit took a risky step today and opened up their algorithm of how they rank stories to the public. I’ve written before about how opening your site’s code to the public can be risky. The real threat with Reddit is people learning the nuances of the algorithm and then gaming the system to get their posts undeservedly to the front page.

Reddit, Digg, Google and any other site that ranks has kept their ranking algorithm a secret for a reason. The algorithm, in theory, is supposed to present an accurate representation of how the collective would rank the items displayed. This is all theory, however, and in practice, there are always ways to game the system. This is why Google constantly tweaks their algorithm (to the frustration of SEO companies everywhere).

This risk that Reddit is taking could lead to great things. We might see a group collaboration behind perfecting the algorithm. Or we might see a few sites getting a disproportionate amount of front page views. My guess is that we’ll see the latter before we see the former. Feel free to check out the code for yourself here. As Techcrunch points out, Digg is still the leader in this category.

Update: Techrunch has taken the code and made a Reddit copycat site. Let the copycats and gaming begin!

The Herald Tribune wrote an interesting article about how certain schools are experimenting with providing incentives to students who do well. These incentives range from providing actual money to the option of breaking the dress code and wearing denim. I’m not sure how I feel about this. In a Management Psychology class I took this past semester (I’m getting my MBA) I learned how important it is to praise someone when they do something well. I remember during my elementary school days, the teachers used to reward us with gold stars and a daily grade (which I’m fairly certain meant nothing). Every teacher had their own style of praise but I didn’t find any of them too effective.

As I think about it now, the problem was that people who weren’t praised developed apathy towards the whole praising process. Those kids (myself being one of them) accepted the fact that they wouldn’t be one of the kids with all the gold stars. If anything, the opposite of the desired effect occurred. The underachievers would be the majority and, out of defensiveness, would make fun of the overachievers. Thus, to be cool, you had to not try. As we can see, the old system isn’t ideal. But is this new solution better?

I think giving money or products to kids doesn’t make much sense. Most schools have students that come from all different classes of wealth. The poor kids could work so hard to earn money and buy something they want. Some rich kids could just ask their parents for it and they’d get it. The desire to work would be based on how easily you have access to what you want. Some parents are just bad and would give their kid anything they ask for. The idea of earning something school related sounds interesting. The ability to break the dress code or be first in line at lunch is something parents can’t buy their child. Further study needs to be done on this topic. I wouldn’t be surprised if the positive or negative results of some of these programs is directly correlated to how much parents agree with the program. Either way, it’s nice to see schools trying to innovate in education.